If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Thought this would be worth reviving and asking if anyone (BibleWorks staff, especially) is able to comment on whether GBS has worked something out with BibleWorks? I'd pay for an add-on module (if reasonable) of both BHS and BHQ--both are available in Accordance right now. I'm tempted to just pull the trigger and get it there, but want to wait a bit first and see if it's something to expect in BibleWorks any time soon.

By the way, while I'm here, I want to add: for as useful as NA28 could be, the CNNTS apparatus is amazingly included in the BibleWorks package, as well as those tasty manuscript images. I don't see any need for the NA28 apparatus, certainly--the text could be nice, but I don't think it's a huge deal.

Text criticism tools for the Hebrew Bible, on the other hand... would love to see more of those!

BHS Apparatus

Originally Posted by AbramKJ

Thought this would be worth reviving and asking if anyone (BibleWorks staff, especially) is able to comment on whether GBS has worked something out with BibleWorks? I'd pay for an add-on module (if reasonable) of both BHS and BHQ--both are available in Accordance right now. I'm tempted to just pull the trigger and get it there, but want to wait a bit first and see if it's something to expect in BibleWorks any time soon.

By the way, while I'm here, I want to add: for as useful as NA28 could be, the CNNTS apparatus is amazingly included in the BibleWorks package, as well as those tasty manuscript images. I don't see any need for the NA28 apparatus, certainly--the text could be nice, but I don't think it's a huge deal.

Text criticism tools for the Hebrew Bible, on the other hand... would love to see more of those!

All I can tell you is that we made a proposal some time ago and have not gotten a response. You could put a bug in the GBS ear if you want.

It is hard to get information but I am not sure that there is any difference between the NA27 and NA28 text. As far as I know the changes are in print presentation and apparatus. But I could be wrong about that. It is hard to get definitive answers.

It is hard to get information but I am not sure that there is any difference between the NA27 and NA28 text. As far as I know the changes are in print presentation and apparatus. But I could be wrong about that. It is hard to get definitive answers.

Mike

The difference in text between NA27 and NA28 is really not significant. The text is same in all places except the Catholic Epistles, and even then there are only 34 places where the text is different. And most of those changes look like they're minor - it looks like some of them were already bracketed readings, others have been well marked in the apparatus by a close balance of witnesses. In other words, the new readings aren't "new", they're just a change of opinion of what reading belongs in the text vs. the apparatus.

You can get a pretty good idea of what the new readings are if you go to Wieland's website. But his list will not yet be the same as the NA28. He highlights the corrected readings in red font based on the first edition of the Editio Critica Maior. The NA28 will be based on the 2nd edition, which actually will be published AFTER the NA28 is released (as far as I know). [For instance the official NA28 website says that the NA28 reading will say ὄντως at 2 Pe 2:18, but Wieland's website says that the first edition of the ECM printed the reading ὀλίγως while noting in the apparatus that ὄντως is an alternate reading.]

I know when it comes to textual crit stuff, people can have very sharp opinions, but unless you are someone publishing in the scholarly field, I don't know that you really need to rush to buy the NA28.

Hey Lee, to use the words of a professor of mine, BHQ is like the "Cadillac" of apparati. Much easier to follow than the BHS Apparatus. Much more English than Latin. In addition, it deciphers the Masorah. Big improvement, in my estimation. I hear that Oxford University Press is also working on an apparatus of their own. Till now, this has been the exclusive domain and work of the German Bible Society.

Hey Lee, to use the words of a professor of mine, BHQ is like the "Cadillac" of apparati. Much easier to follow than the BHS Apparatus. Much more English than Latin. In addition, it deciphers the Masorah. Big improvement, in my estimation. I hear that Oxford University Press is also working on an apparatus of their own. Till now, this has been the exclusive domain and work of the German Bible Society.

Irving,

Thanks for the reply and info. I've read a few blurbs here and there about BHQ, but wasn't sure what set it apart from BHS to that degree. You mention Oxford's apparatus . . . is Hebrew University's Bible going to leave off producing an apparatus?